Hi, I really like your videos. However, to quote what I've said in a reply below: "Schizophrenia's a biologically onset thing, not an illness that can be caused by some kind of betreyal, however traumatic." Even the term madness is really controversial and vague modern day.
Thanks for watching! And just to be clear, I completely recognize that schizophrenia is not something that just occurs in a person because of trauma or anguish. What I wanted to point out by highlighting Azula's hallucinations and delusions (which are actual symptoms of psychosis- see the DSM5) is that the Avatar writing team sought to portray her insanity quite literally. I mentioned in an early part of the video that the difference between "corruption" and "madness" is rather artistic because of the subjectivity of perceived mental instability. Instead of hinting at Azula's unhealthy mental state, the writers used the symptoms of a real-world mental illness to portray it objectively. Whether she actually had it or not isn't for me to say, but the signs are there. Also, as someone who is currently working towards a Masters in Psychology, I understand your point about "madness" being a vague controversial term. In an actual therapeutic setting, that term would never be used. But as far as writing and narratives go, madness is a thematic tool used to highlight specific messages in a story. Lastly, for anyone else reading this comment, 1) I am very aware of the controversies surrounding the Stanford Prison Experiment. Its inclusion in the video was to show how humanity has been interested in finding answers to corruption and its correlates, not to prove that positions of power actually corrupt people 100% of the time. In fact, I never say the study proves anything. And 2) I did not diagnose Azula as schizophrenic. I said she displayed symptoms indicative of schizophrenia (hallucinations, delusions, paranoia). Trust me guys, I do my research haha! I owe you all at least that!
ARG_JoeG Schizophrenia requires a biological predisposition to it for a person to become schizophrenic. A person who goes through trauma won't be schizophrenic unless they have the genes for it. On the flip side, someone who has the genes for schizophrenia might never show symptoms.
Modern studies suggest that there is a genetic component and, commonly, a triggering event that will cause the onset of schizophrenia. There is a famous example of two twin brothers that have been studied extensively. One had developed severe schizophrenia and the other was seemingly unaffected by the disease.
Danny didn't abandon her morals in further pursuit of her goal. She had already achieved it, and THEN abandoned her morals. That's one of the reasons for fan outrage. It was ummotivated.
Oh hey bells are ringing. That means surrender. Suddenly goes mad and starts burning down random citizens. Ignores the person who created all of this suffering and pain for her. Just to randomly burn down the city. With it being bells that sets her off for some reason. When all she needs to do is take out one last foe and total victory. Heck the original plan that was agree upon, in getting to the city, was taking a land route. Only for her to suddenly go oh yeah, we are going by sea for reasons. When there was no need to risk anything or anyone. When could of simply done what Alexander the great did. Capture the cities supporting the navy and cripple it that way. Making it simply no threat by removing the places it can go to for resupply. Thar or going with the navy plan. The lack of how consistence these dragons are, is something. One episode the iron fleet has pin point aim and able to take down a dragon with ease. Next episode, all of them get burn to ashes and i don't think so much as a single shot was fire while this was happening. With somehow, she was ambushed at sea. When she has two dragons, which would be akin to having planes in the middle ages. How do you get ambush when you have such a massive field of vision? Alot of these moments leading up this seem very questionable. Came off as the writers trying to force this to happen, rather then letting it happen normally.
@@forestelfranger What would have made the "madness" scene make sense is if she had a traumatic experience that related to bells ringing that brought forth repressed emotions and memories that nobody else would have know about except the viewer. Alas they didn't think that far ahead, and simply wanted to be done with the show.
@@AlcorSalvador or if she decided to barbecue king's landing immediately after the death of rhageal. We have had the fact of her dragons are her children hammered repeatedly so that would be a better inciting factor than her going ballistic after keeping her composure
There's also the fact that if the Irob Throne was all she cared about, she could have easily taken the ships the Masters offered her and gone to Westeros a lot sooner.
Azula's character is introduced with "Only a hair out of place." And then, in the closing moments of her character-arc and the story, we actively see her trying to fix her own hair to disastrous results. It's little touches like this that makes Avatar: TLA storytelling perfection. Great work on this video. Thanks!
Meaning with Korra they either: A) Didn't understand their own story or B) Had the George Lucas problem where they were surrounded by talented people and didn't realize just how much of the success of the original was due to their influence, not merely your own.
Maybe because you already have mixed feelings for her? The end of the last Agni Kai is always hard for me. When she is absolutely done, screaming her frustration and sadness out... This last fire breath... 😢
@Regular Slime we also weren't talking about Himmler and Goebbles in WWII so that's completely irrelevant to make your opinion on my opinion. So bye Felicia 😘
For me the "corruption" in Death Note was never really a big point of Light Yagami's character, he gets all the corruption over and done with by the end of the first episode. What is interesting is the new philosophy and set of ideals that he adopts after the corruption, and how his new ideals are challenged by his opponents in the series. For other characters like Azula the corruption is more of a main aspect, gradually taking place and growing over the entire series and only culminating at the conclusion of her character arc.
I think macbeth is better, both walter white and light were already just one step from being magliomaniacs to begin with, but lacked the power. Light even more. Macbeth hesitates initially but gets more ruthless over time.
One problem with Dany’s story is that she didn’t “abandon her values in pursuit of her goal”. She had already won the battle for King’s Landing when she decided to kill everyone.
@@Noxims47314 As someone who has watched it, I gotta say there really is no coherent explanation for her actions or the actions of any other character in Season 8 except that the writers completely stopped pretending to care and tried to end it as quickly as possible.
@@IchibanOjousama True lol. But we always had that plausible deniability. Every time there was another dip in quality I told myself "I'm okay with this not making sense and being disappointing because it's building up to the amazing ending." Pretty sure that's what the writers were banking on anyways, just makes it all the more insulting what they actually ended up doing.
You missed a good parallel with Zuko and Azula. They both got corrupted. Zuko was as selfless as Aang once. Then he became selfish and hateful, with one goal: the Avatar. Zuko was saved before he fell into madness. Azula was not. Really good parallel you helped me notice.
I dont think Zuko was ever as selfless as Aang, but definitely a much nicer person. A decent person, then he was corrupted by his father and the Fire Nation's war with the rest of the world. His uncle Iroh, who was also a very corrupted person in his youth but became good after his son's death, helped plant the seed of goodness again. From it bloomed Zuko's good conscience again.
I think GOT managed to achieve this way more successfully with Cersei's storyline through seasons 5 and 6. In her quest for power, she gets arrested by the Faith Militant (after giving them the power to do so) and endures terrible humiliation, which ultimately leads to her burning the sept of Baelor and causing the death of her last child (the one thing she loved and cared for beyond herself). She temporarily achieves her goal of power, at the cost of her children, only to then lose it all once Daenerys comes to Westeros.
yep, her chapters in the book have her pretty paranoid that even her own relatives like Jaime and her uncle Kevan, may be her enemies when they try to advise her. Not to mention she lets Qyburn do pretty evil deeds to people who she's afraid may out her. I loved when they sidestepped all that by trying to say she has 'some' good in there 'somewhere' lol.
Her entire arc works, imho - her motivation has always been preventing/disproving the predictions of Maggie the Frog. She hoards power and influence whenever she can because she thinks she's smarter than she is*, and that she will be able to use it to protect the people she cares for (her, Jaime and the kids). She's certain her father is wrong in his estimation of her intelligence because of misogyny (and maybe she's right in that) but she also doesn't apply herself to study - or perhaps wasn't allowed to study - to the degree that Tyrion has. Likewise, Tywin is obsessed with the family name/legacy (because of his feelings of vulnerability from his own father's naivety/being manipulated by his advisors and inferiors), which drives him to force things on his children which ultimately causes the end of most of the family line. Tyrion may still have legitimate kids at some point, of course, but the legacy will not be the one Tywin had worked his entire life trying to create/control.
That is because they favored Cersei way more than Dany who they just hated clearly, especially with the line in scripts against liberation ideology - because she was too fierce and scary for them. I think D and D made Cersei very similar to Benioff himself which is why she was given way more depth and unjustly redeemed.
The spider-man quote was actually orignally written as "with great power THERE MUST ALSO come great responsibility". The original phrasing makes it clear that there has to be concious effort to be repsonsible otherwise, naturally you'll be corrupted. The new phrasing makes it seem like the responsibility is inherent to the power when it isn't.
Now I get it. I never liked that quote, as you are obliged to do what's good for others because you can and if you want something for you well to bad. If presented as a choice (the better choice) then I like it more.
fran3ro Both sentences convey the exact same message so your comment makes no sense. You are morally obliged to act. They original quote says “MUST come with great responsibility” not “probably should”.
@@UltimateKyuubiFox I see it as "must" separates the supposedly inherent responsability, making it more a opinion or advise from the speaker on what SHOULD come with power than an actual moral maxim or inseparable attibute of the power. For more information check the OP comment.
fran3ro it sounds like you don’t like to be told the power you wield makes you responsible for the powerless around you. I can see why that’d be the case, but both quotes make that exact claim.
@@UltimateKyuubiFox They don't, I already explained why, it's all about how is said not what is said. Read again the OP comment, not my first comment. Realistically power =/= responsability. Power = power, and anyone with power can do whatever he/she wants with it and the powerless can't do anything about it, that's why the powerful rules over the powerless. We can put laws and moral to mask it and protect the powerless, but that's just a facade, a good one for the powerless, but nothing more.
Azulas obsession with perfection was her downfall. Her control of her emotions eventually caught up with her when she lost everything from shutting off her humanity
Questions: Does Power corrupts those who have it? Or Does Power reveals who they always were? Should power be interpreted in a case by case basis??? 🤔🤔🤔
Thats a really good question but i think the answer is that both are true. It depends on the character and situation of the person who gets that power. Think of a vicious, poor person with bad habits who gains power in the form of wealth. Such a person would use money to do whatever he wanted. On the other hand consider someone who is disciplined and has some sort of moral goal to achieve. Such a person might start from humble beginnings but becomes corrupted by committing actions they never could have imagined they would commit. This kind of corruption is the slow step by step process that changes who that person is while the former is simply the person revealing their true nature.
That is a good question because, ultimately, you’re asking one of the biggest questions in philosophy - are people naturally good? If no, you could make the case that power reveals innate corruption and lets the depravity of the individual - which would have otherwise been hidden or controlled by equal powers - out. If yes, then you have to ask if anyone is actually bad or simply misguided and why. Both great questions!
Dany could have been fixed by one simple small change: if she had attacked the Red Keep to kill Cersei first, the flames of her dragon would billow through the tunnels below and ignited the Wildfire, thus killing the civilians in the city. Done.
I know! this would've been such a simple change and it would've made everything she says later make sense (at least in a twisted way). Like it still needed more build up, but that would've made it much better
A definite improvement, but too forgivable for her to really be in morally grey area; no reasonable person could see that as a potential outcome of burning the red keep, so while it would be impactful in an ironic Greek-tragedy kind of way, it wouldn't be a corruption story. I would have her start by using her dragon on the Lannister troops fighting her men, then continuing to burn them as they fled, then continuing to burn them as the scattered into the populace, too obsessed with her goal and her vengeance to care about the innocent lives she was taking.
Or (although outplayed) have a time jump to dany completely mad and obsessed with fire like her father before her. Dany demands tyron to burn Westeros. Then, after years of service, tyron kills her. That would make for a conclusion I could've lived with tbh
Apparently, that IS what was in the original shooting script and VFX plan. There are shots where the Wildfire was incompletely swapped out for dragon fire and one of the VFX guys talks on the DVD commentary about how they were going to kill Cersei and Jamie with a fireball but then D&D told them Tyrion was going to find their bodies so they just dumped a bunch of bricks on them to keep them pristine.
It’s brilliant (and evil) playing little soldier boy/leaves from the vine while discussing azula’s descent into madness pointing out how sad her descent and life truly is.
Dany didn't go mad because Cersei chopped up her favorite duolingo app or something like that. She went mad, because GRRM had told the writers she would, and there were only two episodes left so it needed to happen now.
Yeah kinda sad, Dany had the potential to become an amaizing and memorable villian/antagonist but they messed it up so bad that it doesn't even feel interesting or good.
My biggest problem with Daenerys is that they didn't SHOW her descend into madness. She was fine and pretty darn rational and then 2 episodes later she goes and does something she KNOWS is wrong. I would have been ok if she was remorseful afterwards, but they took all the character building they developed over seasons and expected a few traumatic events to be reason enough for her to throw everything into the wind. If they spent a few more episodes showing how she was dealing with the loss of her dragons and friends they could have really made a convincing argument.
They didn't want to do that because they hated Dany is pretty clear, I mean if Arya had got the dragons she would have turned half of Westeros into Ash.
The writers of the show revealed they don't understand corruption, but I would also say they have revealed again and again, throughout all the shows, that they don't understand trauma! That annoyed me almost from the start.
You should watch Vsauce's video on the Stanford prison experiment. It was very biased, they chose aggressive people to be the prison guards and encouraged them to treat the prisoners badly. It is not a case of normal people going mad with power.
@@Visplight I don't really get what he's getting at either. He probably didn't like you stereotyping white men like that and countered with black people this..
@@Visplight He was calling the content of your first comment ridiculous, then made fun of you when you didn't get it. That's not him being bad at something or other, it's you being dense, just like he said.
I love how bending of elements not only reflects one's personality but can also affect one's personality. It was done in such a subtle way in Avatar. I would love to see this concept explored more. I would love to see an Avatar who is teetering on the edge of corruption but never fully succumbing as they struggle to use their powers responsibly.
I really like "a christmas carol" by Charles Dickens which, although it's rarely discussed, paints a very tragic picture of a man who grew up with a skewed world view that resulted in mistakes that cost him most of what he loved in the pursuit of money. With little else left in his life he became obsessed with profit and ended up sacrificing everything for a goal that brings him nothing but misery.
The Dark Knight is a story of corruption, just not of the Joker's. It's Harvey Dent's corruption, orchestrated by the Joker. "You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain." A pretty empty claim, but there it is. Harvey is a stand-in for the general populace and its hopes for a better world, and his soul is contested by the Joker on one hand and Batman on the other. In the end he succumbs to madness and corruption, but Batman pretends he didn't for .... reasons. "He's not the hero we have, but he's the hero we deserve, because he's not a hero, but he's the hero we need." or somesuch nonsense.
The Dark Knight was about whether people or society would succumb to corruption if pressed. The Joker's main goal was to prove that anyone would throw aside their morals under the right conditions. And the joker is right, at least for the most part. Most people will throw aside their morals when under sufficient threat. But batman is only resisting the corruption of his last moral- he has 1 rule: "I don't kill people". That means batman has given up on his other morals- batman, as a vigilante, is corrupt. He is a criminal working outside of the system. This is why the joker loves Batman. Batman has been able to resist that corruption to a point, and is a filling a role similar to the joker- but on the opposite side of the argument. Batman is a symbol of hope- but he is not a symbol of purity because he has given up most of his morals and half-fallen to corruption. That is why he thinks the city needs Harvey Dent. Harvey is the symbol of purity- he is a good guy working within the system, whose morals are uncorrupted. And the movie is saying that Harvey is important as a symbol because no one can survive with all of their morals intact. Batman is a symbol of hope, not purity. Harvey is a symbol of purity, killed before anyone can learn the truth that purity is futile and unrealistic.
@@GnarledStaff yes and no - the ferries prove that most people in Gotham won't. Batman says as much to Joker - they prove him wrong by not using the opportunity to blow up the other boat to save themselves. Did some on each boat want to? Yes, but they did win out. Some people on the first boat even start to find ways to logically argue that they have "more right" to live, because the other boat is full of convicts* and that's where the corruption can start. But someone in prison for car theft/fraud/drugs has no less right to live than someone in their boat who has committed no - or at least not been caught and prosecuted for - crimes. Even in the USA most crimes do not get the death penalty. When you start down that line of thought, who knows where you will end up? *and boat staff, and the correctional officers, who they don't mention because it's not helpful to that line of thinking
Batman fabricates a lie that Harvey didn't kill people he didn't because all the hundreds people that Harvey was responsible for putting into jail would be freed if he was found to be a criminal. Thus, Batman takes the fall for the killings, taking the blame off of Harvey, to keep criminals off the street, because "he's the hero Gotham deserves, just not the one it needs right now"
I think the problem with Dany's story-line was that the writers relied on the idea that Dany went mad because she was a Targaryen, and it was inevitable; they used this as a shortcut to corruption, without developing the character arc that would normally be necessary for a character to get there, and so fails to develop any sort of compelling story around it. Her decline isn't caused by an all-consuming goal, or the corrupting nature of power, it basically boils down to: "Some of her friends died and, idk, bitch went crazy."
Very well said. I've been wrestling w why I found GoT's portrayal of "going mad" so problematic (as someone suffering from mental issues, trauma being one of them). This breakdown made so much sense of trauma vs corruption. I would say the emphasis on the idea that her madness is inevitable because it's in her genes is another fault.
Absolutely loved your comparison between the fate of Azula and Daenerys. They really did have the same sort of upbringing and downfall into madness; yet still remain two wildly different characters in their own right. I’ve been comparing GoT with Avatar quite a lot recently, so it’s awesome that other people see the similarities as well!!
@fusiontoa18 I saw the similarities with the Hound & Zuko as well!! Both got their face mutilated by fire from a close family member, and both had a similar arc of turning their backs on violence and growing beyond their abusers... That was, until D&D just NEEDED Clegane Bowl to please the fans , so they decided to throw all of his characters development out the window just to return to violence... to kill his already dead, zombie brother... *sigh*
Bro, why did you play that “Uncle Iroh song” I’m trying to learn how to be a better writer and now I’m crying in the club. Ahh, nostalgia hurts the most.
The problem isn't that the deaths of Jorah, Missandei and Rhaegal were the catalyst that ultimately resulted in Dany's corruption and madness. The problem was that it was presented as component 2, rather than a precursor of component 2. Losing your closest friends and advisors along with your "child" would undoubtedly make her more suspicious, untrusting and even afraid of the people around her. That should've ultimately made her become the cause of the significant event that would bring about serious mental consequences. Dany has always been hot-tempered and uncompromising, nobody can argue against that. And her uncompromising personality has always been softened by her trusted friends and advisors, especially Jorah. So when she loses those "voices of reason", with nobody that would hold her back, that should've been the moment when she makes a fatal mistake that causes some sort of betrayal from someone she's come to trust (personally I think this should've been Varys, since I still believe in the Varys = Blackfyre fan theory in the books). That betrayal would be component 2, which would cause her to slowly become more and more paranoid, and continuously lowering the bar for what consitutes an "enemy" until she finally considers even taking the protection of her enemy (like the people of King's Landing taking the protection of Cersei) to be the same as *being* her enemy
Tbh I think lelouch from code geass is a better example of this than light. Light had morals for about.5 of a second, where as lelouch had a whole season building to his decent.
Lelouch does descend, but he ends the series with his own calculated death (I'm not getting into the movie and it's left field plot/plot holes). He knew that absolute power corrupted absolutely, look at this family and their "powers" and his determination to remove them from the world. He knew that with great power there must also be great responsibility, look at his handling of the character of Zero and the way he hands off the mantle to Suzaku, as well as his refusal to give in to using his own powers for his own gain. I'm by no means defending him and saying he's a good person or not corrupted. He just realizes what's happening, and does his best to set up precautions/safeguards against it ruining his end goal. He also doesn't alter his end goal. Sorry this got a bit long, just my thoughts on the subject. Code Geass is rather interesting to me!
That is honestly been my problem with Death Note and why I couldn't get into it. Light decides, after about a minute of having a normal human reaction to seeing/causing a death, to become a ruthless killer. He starts killing innocent people incredibly quickly as well and doesn't hesitate to do it. He felt corrupt/evil from the start and it didn't feel like it was setting up a story of the corrupting nature of power.
@@food_toobs8333 Basically, to put it simply, Lelouch was such a great character that he calculated and planned his own decent into corruption (under the mantle of "Zero") because he knew it was required to fulfill his goal of uniting the world, and he completed this via giving his own life without ever going mad (as stated in this video; "corruption" and "madness" are two completely different things). In other words, Lelouch was self-aware of his descent...which is honestly something I can't say for many characters. Think the only other character who comes to mind is Eren.
Not to mention the huge leap between caring for common folk and wanting to protect innocents over thoughtlessly slaughtering them, while Azula never showed concern for anyones life (except possibly her brother at a certain point when he was an ally, and her father's but for her own gain). Not to say such a leap isn't possible or doesn't work in the context of the corruption narrative, it does, but in the space of just two episodes out of eight seasons? Nah.
A big issue when talking about any of this type of psychology in pop culture is that the layman's idea of madness and a psychiatrist's and lawyer's definitions are entirely different things. If a person shoots up a bunch of people, the media and average person infer that they were insane or mad but most of the time they knew what they were doing, and therefore it is not counted as "insanity" wherein the person is detached from reality and does not necessarily actually understand the consequences of their actions. Another big issue are the terms Psychopath and Sociopath that people often get mixed up and the thought that a psychopath instantly means serial killer or "person with psychosis" when it actually means neither. Psychosis is completely detached from being a Psychopath. Psychopath's do no suffer from psychosis anymore than the average person. There are many top business men and women that are psychopaths as they do not actually feel emotion for others and simply fake it and pretend like they care to manipulate. They are great at reading others and figuring out how to fake emotion to manipulate them into getting what they want and they feel little to no guilt for doing so. That ruthlessness is highly beneficial for them in what we would call "cut throat" industries. With all this in mind, facts I'm sure you're already aware of anyway, Dany's descent into "madness" was not actually madness at all. She didn't lose her mind, her senses, or become completely detached from reality. You could say that her saviour complex and destiny outlook was detached from reality and it was but no more than a person believing they were meant to be with their significant other. That they have a "soul mate" pre-destined in time. That's absolute nonsense. Someone believing in any man-made religion, could also be seen as a detachment from reality. Believing in ghosts, a detachment from reality and so on, however you would never call any of those people "insane" or "mad" in a literal sense just for having those beliefs unless it was taken to absolute extremes, and even then, would most likely not pass for actual insanity in terms of law. There's just such a divide between, "this person kills people and doesn't care and is therefore what we would call mad" and the actual psychiatric and legal definitions of madness. Dany didn't go insane or descend into madness. She just became a horrible person with delusions of grandeur albeit, way too fast. Yes the signs were there before throughout earlier episodes, we just never saw them thanks to how they portrayed her as this saviour figure, the same way American "heroes" kill countless people in films and because heroic music plays, we all clap along and cheer thinking they're the "good guys" while a jet fire bombs half of Vietnam, but the actual change that takes place is all within the last season, over about 4 episodes, one of which is nearly just a full battle and doesn't give any time to her change (though technically adds to it due to circumstances). It's just too rushed. It flies by too fast. Yes the potential was always there but just like everything in the last season, (last two arguably) it's more about HOW they got to where they did, not WHAT actually happened. All of the things that happened are fine, it's just the way they happened that makes no sense and was screwed up.
While I agree with you on the analysis of media, law, and Dany's "decent" (etc.), I do have a critic on you examples regarding psychopaths. By definition, psychopaths are aggressive and violent, two traits that "top business" people do not share. A psychopath has to keep moving from location to location in order to keep their power in tact. If they stay in one place for too long, their victims will undoubtedly be betrayed or hurt, allowing for others around them to acknowledge what the psychopath really is. The CEOs so many use as an example simply do not exist. A CEO does not operate on their own, they have a team that can remove them from their position if their leader is deemed unfit. Surely one could argue that the powerful people at the top are all corrupt and do not care if their leader is evil, but then the company itself would fall apart. Examples of this include the fall of the Nazi party as well as the instability of the Russian Revolution. The misleading personality traits CEOs have that are associated with psychopaths are their low levels of agreeableness and low levels of neuroticism (two of the Big Five Personality traits used by psychologists).
"Someone believing in man-made religion can also be seen as detached from reality." Oh quit it already with that repeated mantra of believing in higher powers equals send them to the doctor. www.patheos.com/blogs/accordingtomatthew/2017/08/claiming-religion-mental-illness-conflicts-psychological-science/
@@arnowisp6244 he literally said the opposite of what you're accusing him of! It was one of many examples of belief that we don't consider a sign of madness/insanity/mental instability. Ironically, it seems that you're just looking for an argument on that topic, because what you claim to see isn't what is there.
@@helenl3193 "Someone who believes in man-made religion can be seen as detached from reality." His words. He's talking about how WE don't consider that a mental illness and like someone believing in ghost. But its clear he considers that...unplesant. It looks like you're the one not understanding what he said.
One of my favorite topics when it's covered in any medium, whether it be in books, tv shows, film, or video games. My favorite antagonists and/or tragic heroes usually explore this theme in a nuanced way. Your analysis of Azula particularly reminds me just how incredible the character arcs and narrative in ATLA was. Azula's main goal and side goal...Though their stories are obviously different at first, her ending very much aligns with Mad King Aerys II. Great inclusion of Light and Walter's descent. Although Dany's "descent" was hardly believable in the show, I still think GRRM has the chance to continue to build Dany's ending in the books into something more rewarding for the character arc (even if it ends in tragedy). Overall nice job with this!
The Stanford prison experiment however does not show that power corrupts. It's now know it was a fake and that the head researcher had to coax the "guards" to abuse the "prisoners". Effectively failing to prove that a mere position of power leads to abuse. You might want to revise that bit.
The professor unintentionally abused his power and got caught up by ending up as part o the experiment. He ended up unintentionally abusing his role in the experiment to escalate the situation. And he was in power effecively in the experiment. He failed the experiment but that abuse of power with a bit of gain or encouragement, that exists in societial structures, that was shown. Given prisoners and guards are enduring that way longer, it does far from disprove his position. Hell it ended one of the examples that roles in power can definitly corrupt the best of intentions you had for most of the people. Its fair to say that power corrupts most people, even in this experiment.
@@davidwilli5542 It was a scandal just some time ago. You might want to check medium.com/s/trustissues/the-lifespan-of-a-lie-d869212b1f62 and/or www.editions-zones.fr/livres/histoire-d-un-mensonge/
@@jonsnor4313 He was corrupt from the beginning. He had political motivations, wanting to get prison reforms done. The experiment is useless, and him being a fraud does not prove anything.
I think another great example here would be Hakuryuu Ren from Magi: The Labyrinth of Magic. With his goal of killing his mother for her crimes of murdering his father and brothers and having his uncle usurp the throne from him, but tries to do it with "the moral high ground". But litteraly becomes "a fallen one" (term from the series for people who reject their given fate) in the dungeon of Belial, and joins forces with the dark magi judar, which he despised. And later when he killed his mother it's not enough, he has nowhere to go from there. So he blames his cousin for not fighting his mother and starts a civil war over the throne in which his now beloved partner Judar dies. And there's the point where he changes again and makes him differ from the usual pattern, because he redeems himself. Long story short, I love this character, just thought considering him here too might be interesting.
There are some great examples in the horus heresy, see:magnus Was loyal to the emperor, but his arrogance got the best of him, and was played like a fiddle by the enemy. One of the best ways imo is a good character who has a character flaw like arrogance, rage, or daddy issiess, and it pulls them down the path of madness
Very interesting take, and it makes sense. I have not seen the other works, but was a GoT fan, of course. It definitely makes sense that Daenerys experienced trauma, and that it might drive her to take some action - but that action would have been believable to the audience if it were directed at the cause of that trauma, her enemy. At the point of the bells ringing, she had already obliterated the Iron Fleet (thus striking at and potentially killing that enemy), destroyed the defenses of King's Landing, and mostly destroyed the Golden Company. The only cause of her trauma that was left was Cersei. So having Daenerys attack the Red Keep directly in attempt to destroy Cersei would have made sense in the context of the events leading up to it. The big problem and displeasure was of course that she DID achieve victory over her enemies, even if Cersei wasn't dead, she was defeated. THEN Daenerys abandons her morals and quite deeply changes who she is. This was shocking, not set up and ended up unbelievable.
I just realized Dany and Azula are both 14 in their stories. Both born royal and living through a world war with a tyrant father, an older brother, friends who are subservient to them, and both think they are Goddesses among men.
I like how Joker portrayes other possibility: Arthur descent is joyful, litterally. He feels relieved after he stops resisting and embraces absolute madness. His madness will bring chaos to the world, but he had never felt better.
I found this channel and thought: "I wonder if it will be anything like Hello Future Me". Ten minutes in when ATLA was brought up: "Yep, exactly like Hello Future Me".
Good video, but not sure I agree with Martin's characters... They did not BECOME corrupt with power, they were just given the opportunity to show their corruption when their power gave them longer ranger. The dragon princess spent the entirety of the show screaming how she will bathe cities in fire and blood and burnt her 'enemies' in every conflict, namely people who did not agree with her. Bullies like are always bullies, be it on the schoolyard or the golden papal throne. Power doesn't make them, bullies, it just gives them more people to bully. And if they are clever enough, those same people then build them monuments and call them The Great.
Dany's turn in the books appears to be there. However the key missing part is the fact that Aegon was taken out of the show. To some extent he was merged into Jon Snow (and Dany), but poorly so. Aegon is likely to take King's Landing, which was Tyrion's advice after all. Then arrives Dany, who then meets Aegon for the first time and she wonders who is this boy who claims to be her nephew who is dead as far as she knows, and who the City loves more than her, because Aegon drove out Cersei most likely. Add in the whispers of Quaithe and the House of the Undying that warn her not to trust the "Mummer's dragon", after all the others who showed up that they said not to trust prooving true, and you have Dany in a situation where she isn't hailed as "Mhysa" or a savior--which is her preferred version of being a conqueror, but instead presented with the choice of does she trust what prophecy tells her or not? Does she accept co-rulership with Aegon or not? Does she deal well with being seen as a foreign invader who shows up Johnny come lately, rather than as a triumphal liberator? I think that is the moment that she gets put to the test, and where I believe she will tragically fail and fall. She will choose to believe prophesy over Aegon. She will resent the city's choice of Aegon over her, and ultimately not being as well received as she expects or wants, she will release the dragon, as her dreams tell her to do, and take the city through fire and blood. People used to complain about Aegon showing up in the books so late, however it becomes apparent that he is integral to Dany's arc overall if you sit and reflect upon him.
Wow. Spot on analysis as usual. Indeed if Missandei and Rhaegal's deaths were the direct consequence of Dany's action I would be much more convinced of her descent to full blown Mad Queen. For example off the top of my head, she could have ordered a small party fly to King's Landing to offer Cersei an opportunity to surrender, against her council's warnings, only to be ambushed by the archers and scorpions which ultimately kill Rhaegal and Missandei. Although arguably this example is weak and again she would be portrayed as the victim here as well.
I think component 4 needs a slight change, there is a third option. The character achieves their goal but it cost them something that makes it hollow. The "king of an empty world" type of madness. This usually ends with self reflection and regret.
Awesome video! Power/Corruption is one of my favorite storytelling topics (and all of your examples were in my top favorite shows!!) and this was a really great breakdown of the steps a character needs to go through to get there. As a writer it's nice to have a bit of an outline to work with!
Great video, I really appreciate your strong clarification of the difference between trauma and corruption, and how that applies to Azula and Dany's character arcs. Hayley ^_^
Its actually pretty interesting that when asula is in charge? We see blue flames. Its eerie and unsettling but it doesn't feel like a monster hiding in a cave like when ozai is shown.
“Power is dangerous. It corrupts the best and attracts the worst. Power is only given to those who are prepared to lower themselves to pick it up.” ― Ragnar Lothbrok
I think it’s important to note that Azula suffers two betrayals before she breaks. The first is Ty-Lee and Mae, but the second is her father. When Ozai leaves Azula behind, she expresses shock and betrayal, and I think it’s that which finally breaks her.
Very insightful. This addresses the key point of something missing in her descent. It wasn't a descent, but rather a convenient and contrived plot element to wrap up the story. Her agency was gone from the moment she landed in Westeros, relying on her advisers and the situation to dictate her actions. She should've listened to Olenna, this would have made for a much more compelling story, and led to a much more believable descent into madness.
Thank you for this. I have been working on a story with these themes but I never was able to short hand the path needed for it to occur. I knew where they started and the narrative path to get to the end but not WHY it was. Thanks for the tips.
I don't think anyone (*who actually thinks) is upset that Danny "went mad". People are upset at the pacing, presentation, and displayed motivations. I think Death Note displayed Light's decent into corruption, and eventual madness incredibly well.
@RheyaRu!z a well written, and well told story could make the hero you cheered become the villain, and vice versa. Any misogyny you're getting from this, is something youre reading into it.
But isn't Light corrupt from the start? He barely establishes guidelines for himself before breaking them. It honestly feels more like a story of a bad person becoming more evil as they have more power, which isn't really a decent into corruption .
@@LifeUntilLove That's precisely the case. I'm confused as to why Light, Azula and Hannible Lector were in this video as examples. They're all either psychopaths or sociopaths - born with or developed little to no empathy respectively. These characters were _revealed_ as deplorable people, not corrupted.
@@FunZies. I have to disagree with you about Light. At the very beginning, Light is not corrupted. His actions with the Death Note are brought on by a genuine desire to do what he believes to be right for the world. Over the course of the series, we watch that desire become corrupted until Light no longer cares about justice and simply cares about power and control. What starts out as a desire to make the world better, becomes a disguise for him wanting to have total control. It was the power of the death note that ultimately corrupted Light and his intentions.
Dude I hope you see this because as a young writer who is striving to create a tv show that challenges the mind, your content is so fascinating. I really enjoy everything you do and can’t thank you enough!
Thanks so much for pointing out that corruption and trauma are like two sides to a coin! It's a similar pain, but one is brought on by yourself, one by others. Such a good hint, thanks again! I can really use that for my own story ...
One thing I LOVE about Azula's arc is that it really goes full circle. In the first episode with her in you see her commanding a ship and threatening everyone. She performs one of the hardest types of bending there is with only "one hair out of place". In her first fight with Zuko you see him trying his hardest and using fire daggers a move he'd never done before. She doesn't even fire bend during the fight instead she just uses hand to hand combat and just gets him angrier and angrier knowing that he wont think with a level head. She almost never lets her emotions cloud her judgement especially in a fight so during the finale she cuts her hair. Her hair was always perfectly symmetrical so her cutting her hair just shows how far she's fallen from perfection. In the agni kai she doesn't think with a level head but instead just let's Zuko goad her into using lightening which would just work out in his advantage. Her only thought out move during that entire fight was when she shot the lightening at Katara knowing that no matter what happens she would just have one less opponent to face. Whether you like Azula or not her descent into madness is heartbreaking. Zuko had someone to save him and she didn't.
You’re not necessarily wrong, but we also have plenty of examples of people corrupted by power that they didn’t choose to possess. Interesting thought that meritocracy might actually make corruption more likely though.
@@Acsion42 it is refreshing to converse with someone who may...be it partially or completely disagrees with you, and have them simply voice their position without the noise and name calling. You know, to talk like adults we are.
For me an anime called Kiba had a really interesting story about corruption. The main character Zed had a sick mother and late into the series she appears in the new world he travelled to. It was revealed the power that chose him initially chose her whilst pregnant, and she was trained by the same mentor as Zed. Then, after giving birth she lost that power and went crazy. When Zed meets her she seems to be sick as he remembers her- in a vacant way. But then later she tries to kill him for his power. He gets away and it is revealed the reason why she wanted the power in the first place was to protect him.
During the entire video, I keep thinking of one of my favorite animes, Trigun and how and if these themes would apply to it I think I'm going to keep thinking about it for several days to come
i think the enigma of amigara fault by junji ito is a pretty good example of corruption, or more specifically compulsion. you should read it if you haven’t already, it’s not long
This may sound silly but this made me cry because I’ve brought on some much corruption in my life too. The worst part is casting about for someone to blame but you have only yourself to blame. It changes you but with faith you can heal. That’s why I bear this symbol for my channel. My hope for redemption too.
Well the Joker Dead start off as a normal person that got thrown into a vat of I said and turn insane, I know that's a really simplified version of what happened to him but that's not the point. The collapse of the killing joke mostly revolve around Joker's backstory and how he got corrupted. So yeah he does kind of fall into the storytelling category. Also he likes to corrupt other people in the same way or at least similar ways that he was corrupted claiming that one bad day can corrupt or change anyone.
This is kinda like my theory on physical deformity in fiction. When a character is born or introduced with a deformity, those markings are intended to juxtapose internal moral fortitude or, if you will, purity. Deformities that are *earned* are intended to show a character's internal corruption making itself known to others (Ed Elric, Darth Vader, and Inquisitor Glokta).
If for a corruption story the elements are (summarized) 1) the Character has a goal and a code 2) the act of chasing that goal causes something to happen which takes a toll on the character 3) the consequences of step 2 cause an abandonment of a previously upheld character code. Then would a story of restoration be the inverse? 1) the character is lost and hopeless, they are searching for their goal. 2) Something happens to them that ultimately results in a new goal. 3) The character begins chasing and (usually) eventually achieves his or her goal. Obviously this presents a new set of challenges and pit falls to avoid, and is vastly simplified, but I think it generally works. Thoughts?
I tried to make a very similar debate with my friends. I used light from death note as a way to perfectly demonstrate corruption. Because everyone complains that Dany didn't have enough time to become corrupt but death note did it in the first episode. It never even occurred to me the difference between corruption and trauma tho. Amazing video, I'm glad someone had a similar idea
I am watching this video a year late and as such this will probably not been seen by anyone but I really want to comment on how people are misunderstanding Dani’s madness. She didn’t become mad over night, the show and the book show it was always there. Her go to response when faced with a challenge was to kill and burn it all with her dragons. She said she would come back and destroy Quarth in season two, killing everyone in the city. Despite the fact it was only a handful of leaders who denied her entry. When she returned to see her city under attack in season 5, she told Tryon that she was going to burn the enemy cities to the ground, till there was no one left. What changed in the final season is that she lost trust in anyone but herself. She lost the love of Jon, she didn’t trust tyron anymore and saw her two other best friends die. This allowed the darkness with in to take over and is why she burned Kings Landing. She had no one left to hold back her basic response of fire and death. Also, they show over multiple seasons that she is a conqueror and not a ruler. So when she gets Westeros, of course she ends up wanting more. It’s the battle for power that she has ever known, not the want to rule. I think a lot of people wanted to see her over the years as only good, but the show always shows her dark side being pulled back by others, not by herself. Her being lost and incapable of trusting anyone but herself, was her downfall in the end, because the “madness” finally was able to take over. Note, wrote this on my phone, so sorry for misspelling and grammar.
Bravo! I have watched soooooooooooo many videos and read so much about how Danis 'sudden' snap was terrible writing and it came out to left field. I've read the books and the characters in the books were waiting for her to show everyone what her family is most famous for, not all of her family, but most of them. Your comment is the first one I have seen that says what I know to be true of the story. 'Everytime a Targarrion(sp) is born the Gods flip a coin.' This seemed to have slipped pass a lot of fans. Every House was known for something honorable, or great, or decent. Danis House, craziness, brutality and dragons. Tbh, I expected EVERYTHING she became.
Damn Man ! That analysis on the corruption comming from within VS trauma from outside is awesome. The fact that part2 must be coming from the protagonist itself is fascinating. This is brilliant ! You're really good at this :O !!
This explains why I felt so slighted by the GOT finale.. trauma vs corruption... that was an amazing point! I’m going to keep this in mind for my own story
I love that you use cartoons as examples. People for some reason refuse to acknowledge good/great aspects of something they see as being made for kids.
You used Iroh’s music of him crying about the anniversary of his son’s death as the background music. So all I hear is him singing it over you talking about Azula so now I’m crying.
I think what the writers of Got were going for was to show that Daenerys in a way always have had the madness, just that we the audience and the characters around her never really noticed because we supported her decisions. I actually think that Tyrion’s conversation with Jon is quite great, because it retroactively shows that her madness have been present all along. But they didn’t succeed in making her “fall” seem like a climax of her arc or whatever, it should have felt like the realization you get in the “all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” scene. I wished that it would have been a gut punch, but it was simultaneously both predictable and out of character.
Hi, I really like your videos. However, to quote what I've said in a reply below:
"Schizophrenia's a biologically onset thing, not an illness that can be caused by some kind of betreyal, however traumatic." Even the term madness is really controversial and vague modern day.
There is some research to suggest it could. See diathesis-stress model.
Thanks for watching! And just to be clear, I completely recognize that schizophrenia is not something that just occurs in a person because of trauma or anguish. What I wanted to point out by highlighting Azula's hallucinations and delusions (which are actual symptoms of psychosis- see the DSM5) is that the Avatar writing team sought to portray her insanity quite literally. I mentioned in an early part of the video that the difference between "corruption" and "madness" is rather artistic because of the subjectivity of perceived mental instability. Instead of hinting at Azula's unhealthy mental state, the writers used the symptoms of a real-world mental illness to portray it objectively. Whether she actually had it or not isn't for me to say, but the signs are there.
Also, as someone who is currently working towards a Masters in Psychology, I understand your point about "madness" being a vague controversial term. In an actual therapeutic setting, that term would never be used. But as far as writing and narratives go, madness is a thematic tool used to highlight specific messages in a story.
Lastly, for anyone else reading this comment, 1) I am very aware of the controversies surrounding the Stanford Prison Experiment. Its inclusion in the video was to show how humanity has been interested in finding answers to corruption and its correlates, not to prove that positions of power actually corrupt people 100% of the time. In fact, I never say the study proves anything. And 2) I did not diagnose Azula as schizophrenic. I said she displayed symptoms indicative of schizophrenia (hallucinations, delusions, paranoia).
Trust me guys, I do my research haha! I owe you all at least that!
ARG_JoeG Schizophrenia requires a biological predisposition to it for a person to become schizophrenic. A person who goes through trauma won't be schizophrenic unless they have the genes for it. On the flip side, someone who has the genes for schizophrenia might never show symptoms.
They may not state it but I wouldn't be surprised if she had some family history of it.
Modern studies suggest that there is a genetic component and, commonly, a triggering event that will cause the onset of schizophrenia. There is a famous example of two twin brothers that have been studied extensively. One had developed severe schizophrenia and the other was seemingly unaffected by the disease.
Danny didn't abandon her morals in further pursuit of her goal. She had already achieved it, and THEN abandoned her morals. That's one of the reasons for fan outrage. It was ummotivated.
Oh hey bells are ringing. That means surrender. Suddenly goes mad and starts burning down random citizens. Ignores the person who created all of this suffering and pain for her. Just to randomly burn down the city. With it being bells that sets her off for some reason. When all she needs to do is take out one last foe and total victory.
Heck the original plan that was agree upon, in getting to the city, was taking a land route. Only for her to suddenly go oh yeah, we are going by sea for reasons. When there was no need to risk anything or anyone. When could of simply done what Alexander the great did. Capture the cities supporting the navy and cripple it that way. Making it simply no threat by removing the places it can go to for resupply. Thar or going with the navy plan. The lack of how consistence these dragons are, is something. One episode the iron fleet has pin point aim and able to take down a dragon with ease. Next episode, all of them get burn to ashes and i don't think so much as a single shot was fire while this was happening. With somehow, she was ambushed at sea. When she has two dragons, which would be akin to having planes in the middle ages. How do you get ambush when you have such a massive field of vision?
Alot of these moments leading up this seem very questionable. Came off as the writers trying to force this to happen, rather then letting it happen normally.
@@forestelfranger What would have made the "madness" scene make sense is if she had a traumatic experience that related to bells ringing that brought forth repressed emotions and memories that nobody else would have know about except the viewer. Alas they didn't think that far ahead, and simply wanted to be done with the show.
@@AlcorSalvador or if she decided to barbecue king's landing immediately after the death of rhageal. We have had the fact of her dragons are her children hammered repeatedly so that would be a better inciting factor than her going ballistic after keeping her composure
There's also the fact that if the Irob Throne was all she cared about, she could have easily taken the ships the Masters offered her and gone to Westeros a lot sooner.
@@AlcorSalvador it would also have made more sense if ringing the bells meant surrender in the earlier seasons.
Azula's character is introduced with "Only a hair out of place." And then, in the closing moments of her character-arc and the story, we actively see her trying to fix her own hair to disastrous results.
It's little touches like this that makes Avatar: TLA storytelling perfection.
Great work on this video. Thanks!
Ah, I just get more and more nervous for the live-action remake. How can it be anything but... _Less?_
@@jauxro *SHYAMALAN NOISES*
Ass Man was that movie actually made by him?
Meaning with Korra they either:
A) Didn't understand their own story or
B) Had the George Lucas problem where they were surrounded by talented people and didn't realize just how much of the success of the original was due to their influence, not merely your own.
mariokarter13 it was definitely both
Dude, showing Azula while playing leaves of the vine gave me so many mixed emotions and I don't know why
can't help but cry every time I hear that song. RIP Mako
Maybe because you already have mixed feelings for her?
The end of the last Agni Kai is always hard for me. When she is absolutely done, screaming her frustration and sadness out... This last fire breath... 😢
that's all i could think about, Iroh singing to his son tears falling down his face.
@@2000Quatsch yes you can't help but feel sadness for Azula in that episode.
@Regular Slime we also weren't talking about Himmler and Goebbles in WWII so that's completely irrelevant to make your opinion on my opinion. So bye Felicia 😘
Death Note truly did one of the best depictions on corruption of power and the question on what justice truly is.
but avatar gets the limelight as in every vid on youtube these days
@@ciantaylor6348 It deserves it. (Speaking as a big fan of both!)
For me the "corruption" in Death Note was never really a big point of Light Yagami's character, he gets all the corruption over and done with by the end of the first episode. What is interesting is the new philosophy and set of ideals that he adopts after the corruption, and how his new ideals are challenged by his opponents in the series.
For other characters like Azula the corruption is more of a main aspect, gradually taking place and growing over the entire series and only culminating at the conclusion of her character arc.
"Justice Doesn't Exist in Death Note" is a good video here on YT.
(I don't understand why people still think DN is about justice)
I think macbeth is better, both walter white and light were already just one step from being magliomaniacs to begin with, but lacked the power. Light even more. Macbeth hesitates initially but gets more ruthless over time.
One problem with Dany’s story is that she didn’t “abandon her values in pursuit of her goal”. She had already won the battle for King’s Landing when she decided to kill everyone.
As someone who hasn't watched it, to me it sounds like cleaning the proverbial chess board just because you can.
@@Noxims47314
As someone who has watched it, I gotta say there really is no coherent explanation for her actions or the actions of any other character in Season 8 except that the writers completely stopped pretending to care and tried to end it as quickly as possible.
@@IAmNumber4000 that started in season 5 with Stannis
@@IchibanOjousama True lol. But we always had that plausible deniability. Every time there was another dip in quality I told myself "I'm okay with this not making sense and being disappointing because it's building up to the amazing ending."
Pretty sure that's what the writers were banking on anyways, just makes it all the more insulting what they actually ended up doing.
Shit writing
You missed a good parallel with Zuko and Azula. They both got corrupted. Zuko was as selfless as Aang once. Then he became selfish and hateful, with one goal: the Avatar.
Zuko was saved before he fell into madness. Azula was not. Really good parallel you helped me notice.
Zuko had Iro as a Rolemodel. Azula had her Father.
@@belisarius6949 Iroh is freaking amazing.
@@realar Iroh = Best boi
I dont think Zuko was ever as selfless as Aang, but definitely a much nicer person. A decent person, then he was corrupted by his father and the Fire Nation's war with the rest of the world. His uncle Iroh, who was also a very corrupted person in his youth but became good after his son's death, helped plant the seed of goodness again. From it bloomed Zuko's good conscience again.
That's how I've seen Zuko, he was able to influenced by Iroh. Azula not so much.
*sees Azula in the thumbnail* This is gonna be good *gets popcorn and notepad*
What's the notepad for?
@@fusiontoa18 Notes, just in case I want to write my own stories someday (:
I skipped every part that didn’t talk about Azula
@@musicislife9825 lame
fusiontoa18 Naw fam
I think GOT managed to achieve this way more successfully with Cersei's storyline through seasons 5 and 6. In her quest for power, she gets arrested by the Faith Militant (after giving them the power to do so) and endures terrible humiliation, which ultimately leads to her burning the sept of Baelor and causing the death of her last child (the one thing she loved and cared for beyond herself). She temporarily achieves her goal of power, at the cost of her children, only to then lose it all once Daenerys comes to Westeros.
yep, her chapters in the book have her pretty paranoid that even her own relatives like Jaime and her uncle Kevan, may be her enemies when they try to advise her. Not to mention she lets Qyburn do pretty evil deeds to people who she's afraid may out her. I loved when they sidestepped all that by trying to say she has 'some' good in there 'somewhere' lol.
Her entire arc works, imho - her motivation has always been preventing/disproving the predictions of Maggie the Frog. She hoards power and influence whenever she can because she thinks she's smarter than she is*, and that she will be able to use it to protect the people she cares for (her, Jaime and the kids).
She's certain her father is wrong in his estimation of her intelligence because of misogyny (and maybe she's right in that) but she also doesn't apply herself to study - or perhaps wasn't allowed to study - to the degree that Tyrion has.
Likewise, Tywin is obsessed with the family name/legacy (because of his feelings of vulnerability from his own father's naivety/being manipulated by his advisors and inferiors), which drives him to force things on his children which ultimately causes the end of most of the family line. Tyrion may still have legitimate kids at some point, of course, but the legacy will not be the one Tywin had worked his entire life trying to create/control.
Talyssa Carnero
I’m annoyed they gave Cersei’s Mad Queen plot to Daenerys.
That is because they favored Cersei way more than Dany who they just hated clearly, especially with the line in scripts against liberation ideology - because she was too fierce and scary for them. I think D and D made Cersei very similar to Benioff himself which is why she was given way more depth and unjustly redeemed.
The spider-man quote was actually orignally written as "with great power THERE MUST ALSO come great responsibility". The original phrasing makes it clear that there has to be concious effort to be repsonsible otherwise, naturally you'll be corrupted. The new phrasing makes it seem like the responsibility is inherent to the power when it isn't.
Now I get it. I never liked that quote, as you are obliged to do what's good for others because you can and if you want something for you well to bad. If presented as a choice (the better choice) then I like it more.
fran3ro Both sentences convey the exact same message so your comment makes no sense. You are morally obliged to act. They original quote says “MUST come with great responsibility” not “probably should”.
@@UltimateKyuubiFox I see it as "must" separates the supposedly inherent responsability, making it more a opinion or advise from the speaker on what SHOULD come with power than an actual moral maxim or inseparable attibute of the power. For more information check the OP comment.
fran3ro it sounds like you don’t like to be told the power you wield makes you responsible for the powerless around you. I can see why that’d be the case, but both quotes make that exact claim.
@@UltimateKyuubiFox They don't, I already explained why, it's all about how is said not what is said. Read again the OP comment, not my first comment.
Realistically power =/= responsability. Power = power, and anyone with power can do whatever he/she wants with it and the powerless can't do anything about it, that's why the powerful rules over the powerless. We can put laws and moral to mask it and protect the powerless, but that's just a facade, a good one for the powerless, but nothing more.
Azulas obsession with perfection was her downfall. Her control of her emotions eventually caught up with her when she lost everything from shutting off her humanity
Questions:
Does Power corrupts those who have it?
Or Does Power reveals who they always were?
Should power be interpreted in a case by case basis???
🤔🤔🤔
Very good point
If you like this review watch the Game of Thrones video Lindsey Ellis does. I like her take on it as well.
Thats a really good question but i think the answer is that both are true. It depends on the character and situation of the person who gets that power. Think of a vicious, poor person with bad habits who gains power in the form of wealth. Such a person would use money to do whatever he wanted.
On the other hand consider someone who is disciplined and has some sort of moral goal to achieve. Such a person might start from humble beginnings but becomes corrupted by committing actions they never could have imagined they would commit. This kind of corruption is the slow step by step process that changes who that person is while the former is simply the person revealing their true nature.
That is a good question because, ultimately, you’re asking one of the biggest questions in philosophy - are people naturally good? If no, you could make the case that power reveals innate corruption and lets the depravity of the individual - which would have otherwise been hidden or controlled by equal powers - out. If yes, then you have to ask if anyone is actually bad or simply misguided and why. Both great questions!
trainzen11 power is always dangerous, it attracts the worst and corrupts the best
Dany could have been fixed by one simple small change: if she had attacked the Red Keep to kill Cersei first, the flames of her dragon would billow through the tunnels below and ignited the Wildfire, thus killing the civilians in the city. Done.
I know! this would've been such a simple change and it would've made everything she says later make sense (at least in a twisted way). Like it still needed more build up, but that would've made it much better
Thats what i keep saying!!!
A definite improvement, but too forgivable for her to really be in morally grey area; no reasonable person could see that as a potential outcome of burning the red keep, so while it would be impactful in an ironic Greek-tragedy kind of way, it wouldn't be a corruption story. I would have her start by using her dragon on the Lannister troops fighting her men, then continuing to burn them as they fled, then continuing to burn them as the scattered into the populace, too obsessed with her goal and her vengeance to care about the innocent lives she was taking.
Or (although outplayed) have a time jump to dany completely mad and obsessed with fire like her father before her. Dany demands tyron to burn Westeros. Then, after years of service, tyron kills her. That would make for a conclusion I could've lived with tbh
Apparently, that IS what was in the original shooting script and VFX plan. There are shots where the Wildfire was incompletely swapped out for dragon fire and one of the VFX guys talks on the DVD commentary about how they were going to kill Cersei and Jamie with a fireball but then D&D told them Tyrion was going to find their bodies so they just dumped a bunch of bricks on them to keep them pristine.
It’s brilliant (and evil) playing little soldier boy/leaves from the vine while discussing azula’s descent into madness pointing out how sad her descent and life truly is.
Dany didn't go mad because Cersei chopped up her favorite duolingo app or something like that. She went mad, because GRRM had told the writers she would, and there were only two episodes left so it needed to happen now.
Because they definitely didn’t decline all offers for more seasons.
"Favourite Duolingo app" is the best description of Me Sundae I have ever heard.
Yeah kinda sad, Dany had the potential to become an amaizing and memorable villian/antagonist but they messed it up so bad that it doesn't even feel interesting or good.
He told them the end in season three. So they had more of time...
Don't blame the writers incompetence on GRRM
My biggest problem with Daenerys is that they didn't SHOW her descend into madness. She was fine and pretty darn rational and then 2 episodes later she goes and does something she KNOWS is wrong. I would have been ok if she was remorseful afterwards, but they took all the character building they developed over seasons and expected a few traumatic events to be reason enough for her to throw everything into the wind. If they spent a few more episodes showing how she was dealing with the loss of her dragons and friends they could have really made a convincing argument.
Eren jaeger says hi
They didn't want to do that because they hated Dany is pretty clear, I mean if Arya had got the dragons she would have turned half of Westeros into Ash.
The writers of the show revealed they don't understand corruption, but I would also say they have revealed again and again, throughout all the shows, that they don't understand trauma! That annoyed me almost from the start.
You should watch Vsauce's video on the Stanford prison experiment. It was very biased, they chose aggressive people to be the prison guards and encouraged them to treat the prisoners badly. It is not a case of normal people going mad with power.
I once heard someone say that the Stanford experiment was really only indicative of how rich white young men behave.
@@Visplight , it has nothing to do with that.
@Regular Slime No, you're just really bad at stringing words together and making them come out as anything intelligible.
@@Visplight I don't really get what he's getting at either. He probably didn't like you stereotyping white men like that and countered with black people this..
@@Visplight He was calling the content of your first comment ridiculous, then made fun of you when you didn't get it. That's not him being bad at something or other, it's you being dense, just like he said.
I love how bending of elements not only reflects one's personality but can also affect one's personality. It was done in such a subtle way in Avatar. I would love to see this concept explored more.
I would love to see an Avatar who is teetering on the edge of corruption but never fully succumbing as they struggle to use their powers responsibly.
I really like "a christmas carol" by Charles Dickens which, although it's rarely discussed, paints a very tragic picture of a man who grew up with a skewed world view that resulted in mistakes that cost him most of what he loved in the pursuit of money. With little else left in his life he became obsessed with profit and ended up sacrificing everything for a goal that brings him nothing but misery.
The Dark Knight is a story of corruption, just not of the Joker's. It's Harvey Dent's corruption, orchestrated by the Joker. "You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain." A pretty empty claim, but there it is. Harvey is a stand-in for the general populace and its hopes for a better world, and his soul is contested by the Joker on one hand and Batman on the other. In the end he succumbs to madness and corruption, but Batman pretends he didn't for .... reasons. "He's not the hero we have, but he's the hero we deserve, because he's not a hero, but he's the hero we need." or somesuch nonsense.
you didnt tuly understand dark knight
The Dark Knight was about whether people or society would succumb to corruption if pressed.
The Joker's main goal was to prove that anyone would throw aside their morals under the right conditions.
And the joker is right, at least for the most part. Most people will throw aside their morals when under sufficient threat.
But batman is only resisting the corruption of his last moral- he has 1 rule: "I don't kill people".
That means batman has given up on his other morals- batman, as a vigilante, is corrupt. He is a criminal working outside of the system.
This is why the joker loves Batman. Batman has been able to resist that corruption to a point, and is a filling a role similar to the joker- but on the opposite side of the argument.
Batman is a symbol of hope- but he is not a symbol of purity because he has given up most of his morals and half-fallen to corruption.
That is why he thinks the city needs Harvey Dent. Harvey is the symbol of purity- he is a good guy working within the system, whose morals are uncorrupted.
And the movie is saying that Harvey is important as a symbol because no one can survive with all of their morals intact.
Batman is a symbol of hope, not purity. Harvey is a symbol of purity, killed before anyone can learn the truth that purity is futile and unrealistic.
@@GnarledStaff yes and no - the ferries prove that most people in Gotham won't. Batman says as much to Joker - they prove him wrong by not using the opportunity to blow up the other boat to save themselves.
Did some on each boat want to? Yes, but they did win out.
Some people on the first boat even start to find ways to logically argue that they have "more right" to live, because the other boat is full of convicts* and that's where the corruption can start. But someone in prison for car theft/fraud/drugs has no less right to live than someone in their boat who has committed no - or at least not been caught and prosecuted for - crimes. Even in the USA most crimes do not get the death penalty.
When you start down that line of thought, who knows where you will end up?
*and boat staff, and the correctional officers, who they don't mention because it's not helpful to that line of thinking
Batman fabricates a lie that Harvey didn't kill people he didn't because all the hundreds people that Harvey was responsible for putting into jail would be freed if he was found to be a criminal. Thus, Batman takes the fall for the killings, taking the blame off of Harvey, to keep criminals off the street, because "he's the hero Gotham deserves, just not the one it needs right now"
I think the problem with Dany's story-line was that the writers relied on the idea that Dany went mad because she was a Targaryen, and it was inevitable; they used this as a shortcut to corruption, without developing the character arc that would normally be necessary for a character to get there, and so fails to develop any sort of compelling story around it. Her decline isn't caused by an all-consuming goal, or the corrupting nature of power, it basically boils down to: "Some of her friends died and, idk, bitch went crazy."
Very well said. I've been wrestling w why I found GoT's portrayal of "going mad" so problematic (as someone suffering from mental issues, trauma being one of them). This breakdown made so much sense of trauma vs corruption. I would say the emphasis on the idea that her madness is inevitable because it's in her genes is another fault.
"A slow decent into madness" is basecly my life story from 1th to 9th grade.
Absolutely loved your comparison between the fate of Azula and Daenerys. They really did have the same sort of upbringing and downfall into madness; yet still remain two wildly different characters in their own right.
I’ve been comparing GoT with Avatar quite a lot recently, so it’s awesome that other people see the similarities as well!!
How many did Jamie fit :p ?
Robert Eriksen Jaime could kinda fit as a Zuko in a way. He is probably what would’ve happened to Zuko if he stayed in the fire nation.
@@4words11letters6 the hound and zuko fit much better
Arya = Toph
@fusiontoa18 I saw the similarities with the Hound & Zuko as well!! Both got their face mutilated by fire from a close family member, and both had a similar arc of turning their backs on violence and growing beyond their abusers...
That was, until D&D just NEEDED Clegane Bowl to please the fans , so they decided to throw all of his characters development out the window just to return to violence... to kill his already dead, zombie brother... *sigh*
I love the content. Azula is one of my favorite villains of all time.
Bro, why did you play that “Uncle Iroh song” I’m trying to learn how to be a better writer and now I’m crying in the club. Ahh, nostalgia hurts the most.
same 😭😭😭😭😭
The problem isn't that the deaths of Jorah, Missandei and Rhaegal were the catalyst that ultimately resulted in Dany's corruption and madness. The problem was that it was presented as component 2, rather than a precursor of component 2. Losing your closest friends and advisors along with your "child" would undoubtedly make her more suspicious, untrusting and even afraid of the people around her. That should've ultimately made her become the cause of the significant event that would bring about serious mental consequences.
Dany has always been hot-tempered and uncompromising, nobody can argue against that. And her uncompromising personality has always been softened by her trusted friends and advisors, especially Jorah. So when she loses those "voices of reason", with nobody that would hold her back, that should've been the moment when she makes a fatal mistake that causes some sort of betrayal from someone she's come to trust (personally I think this should've been Varys, since I still believe in the Varys = Blackfyre fan theory in the books). That betrayal would be component 2, which would cause her to slowly become more and more paranoid, and continuously lowering the bar for what consitutes an "enemy" until she finally considers even taking the protection of her enemy (like the people of King's Landing taking the protection of Cersei) to be the same as *being* her enemy
Azula, Daenerys, Light and Gollum on the thumbnail just made me realize all of my favorite characters are insane
*hears the leaves of the vine song start playing*
Don't you do this to me dammit, don't make me cry
Tbh I think lelouch from code geass is a better example of this than light. Light had morals for about.5 of a second, where as lelouch had a whole season building to his decent.
Lelouch does descend, but he ends the series with his own calculated death (I'm not getting into the movie and it's left field plot/plot holes). He knew that absolute power corrupted absolutely, look at this family and their "powers" and his determination to remove them from the world. He knew that with great power there must also be great responsibility, look at his handling of the character of Zero and the way he hands off the mantle to Suzaku, as well as his refusal to give in to using his own powers for his own gain. I'm by no means defending him and saying he's a good person or not corrupted. He just realizes what's happening, and does his best to set up precautions/safeguards against it ruining his end goal. He also doesn't alter his end goal. Sorry this got a bit long, just my thoughts on the subject. Code Geass is rather interesting to me!
That is honestly been my problem with Death Note and why I couldn't get into it. Light decides, after about a minute of having a normal human reaction to seeing/causing a death, to become a ruthless killer. He starts killing innocent people incredibly quickly as well and doesn't hesitate to do it. He felt corrupt/evil from the start and it didn't feel like it was setting up a story of the corrupting nature of power.
@@food_toobs8333 Basically, to put it simply, Lelouch was such a great character that he calculated and planned his own decent into corruption (under the mantle of "Zero") because he knew it was required to fulfill his goal of uniting the world, and he completed this via giving his own life without ever going mad (as stated in this video; "corruption" and "madness" are two completely different things). In other words, Lelouch was self-aware of his descent...which is honestly something I can't say for many characters. Think the only other character who comes to mind is Eren.
@@6ixlxrd yeah that’s a great way to sum it up!
Tbh I think that Light was always a psychopath.
Not to mention the huge leap between caring for common folk and wanting to protect innocents over thoughtlessly slaughtering them, while Azula never showed concern for anyones life (except possibly her brother at a certain point when he was an ally, and her father's but for her own gain). Not to say such a leap isn't possible or doesn't work in the context of the corruption narrative, it does, but in the space of just two episodes out of eight seasons? Nah.
A big issue when talking about any of this type of psychology in pop culture is that the layman's idea of madness and a psychiatrist's and lawyer's definitions are entirely different things. If a person shoots up a bunch of people, the media and average person infer that they were insane or mad but most of the time they knew what they were doing, and therefore it is not counted as "insanity" wherein the person is detached from reality and does not necessarily actually understand the consequences of their actions.
Another big issue are the terms Psychopath and Sociopath that people often get mixed up and the thought that a psychopath instantly means serial killer or "person with psychosis" when it actually means neither. Psychosis is completely detached from being a Psychopath. Psychopath's do no suffer from psychosis anymore than the average person. There are many top business men and women that are psychopaths as they do not actually feel emotion for others and simply fake it and pretend like they care to manipulate. They are great at reading others and figuring out how to fake emotion to manipulate them into getting what they want and they feel little to no guilt for doing so. That ruthlessness is highly beneficial for them in what we would call "cut throat" industries.
With all this in mind, facts I'm sure you're already aware of anyway, Dany's descent into "madness" was not actually madness at all. She didn't lose her mind, her senses, or become completely detached from reality. You could say that her saviour complex and destiny outlook was detached from reality and it was but no more than a person believing they were meant to be with their significant other. That they have a "soul mate" pre-destined in time. That's absolute nonsense. Someone believing in any man-made religion, could also be seen as a detachment from reality. Believing in ghosts, a detachment from reality and so on, however you would never call any of those people "insane" or "mad" in a literal sense just for having those beliefs unless it was taken to absolute extremes, and even then, would most likely not pass for actual insanity in terms of law.
There's just such a divide between, "this person kills people and doesn't care and is therefore what we would call mad" and the actual psychiatric and legal definitions of madness. Dany didn't go insane or descend into madness. She just became a horrible person with delusions of grandeur albeit, way too fast. Yes the signs were there before throughout earlier episodes, we just never saw them thanks to how they portrayed her as this saviour figure, the same way American "heroes" kill countless people in films and because heroic music plays, we all clap along and cheer thinking they're the "good guys" while a jet fire bombs half of Vietnam, but the actual change that takes place is all within the last season, over about 4 episodes, one of which is nearly just a full battle and doesn't give any time to her change (though technically adds to it due to circumstances).
It's just too rushed. It flies by too fast. Yes the potential was always there but just like everything in the last season, (last two arguably) it's more about HOW they got to where they did, not WHAT actually happened. All of the things that happened are fine, it's just the way they happened that makes no sense and was screwed up.
While I agree with you on the analysis of media, law, and Dany's "decent" (etc.), I do have a critic on you examples regarding psychopaths. By definition, psychopaths are aggressive and violent, two traits that "top business" people do not share. A psychopath has to keep moving from location to location in order to keep their power in tact. If they stay in one place for too long, their victims will undoubtedly be betrayed or hurt, allowing for others around them to acknowledge what the psychopath really is. The CEOs so many use as an example simply do not exist. A CEO does not operate on their own, they have a team that can remove them from their position if their leader is deemed unfit. Surely one could argue that the powerful people at the top are all corrupt and do not care if their leader is evil, but then the company itself would fall apart. Examples of this include the fall of the Nazi party as well as the instability of the Russian Revolution. The misleading personality traits CEOs have that are associated with psychopaths are their low levels of agreeableness and low levels of neuroticism (two of the Big Five Personality traits used by psychologists).
"Someone believing in man-made religion can also be seen as detached from reality."
Oh quit it already with that repeated mantra of believing in higher powers equals send them to the doctor.
www.patheos.com/blogs/accordingtomatthew/2017/08/claiming-religion-mental-illness-conflicts-psychological-science/
@@arnowisp6244 he literally said the opposite of what you're accusing him of!
It was one of many examples of belief that we don't consider a sign of madness/insanity/mental instability.
Ironically, it seems that you're just looking for an argument on that topic, because what you claim to see isn't what is there.
@@helenl3193 "Someone who believes in man-made religion can be seen as detached from reality."
His words. He's talking about how WE don't consider that a mental illness and like someone believing in ghost. But its clear he considers that...unplesant.
It looks like you're the one not understanding what he said.
One of my favorite topics when it's covered in any medium, whether it be in books, tv shows, film, or video games. My favorite antagonists and/or tragic heroes usually explore this theme in a nuanced way.
Your analysis of Azula particularly reminds me just how incredible the character arcs and narrative in ATLA was. Azula's main goal and side goal...Though their stories are obviously different at first, her ending very much aligns with Mad King Aerys II. Great inclusion of Light and Walter's descent. Although Dany's "descent" was hardly believable in the show, I still think GRRM has the chance to continue to build Dany's ending in the books into something more rewarding for the character arc (even if it ends in tragedy). Overall nice job with this!
The Stanford prison experiment however does not show that power corrupts. It's now know it was a fake and that the head researcher had to coax the "guards" to abuse the "prisoners". Effectively failing to prove that a mere position of power leads to abuse. You might want to revise that bit.
I'm also not sure what he means when he says the professor was 'incensed' by the experiment. He was outraged? Angry? What?
The professor unintentionally abused his power and got caught up by ending up as part o the experiment. He ended up unintentionally abusing his role in the experiment to escalate the situation. And he was in power effecively in the experiment. He failed the experiment but that abuse of power with a bit of gain or encouragement, that exists in societial structures, that was shown.
Given prisoners and guards are enduring that way longer, it does far from disprove his position. Hell it ended one of the examples that roles in power can definitly corrupt the best of intentions you had for most of the people.
Its fair to say that power corrupts most people, even in this experiment.
do you have a source saying its fake because its used in my psycologie book we use in class
@@davidwilli5542 It was a scandal just some time ago.
You might want to check medium.com/s/trustissues/the-lifespan-of-a-lie-d869212b1f62 and/or www.editions-zones.fr/livres/histoire-d-un-mensonge/
@@jonsnor4313 He was corrupt from the beginning. He had political motivations, wanting to get prison reforms done. The experiment is useless, and him being a fraud does not prove anything.
I would love for you to do an analysis on Griffith from "Berserk" as he is probably the best fictional character who is obssesed with power.
Not sure you can qualify Griffith as corrupt, he started out that way, half of his character was act to attract people he could use
And he did nothing wrong
@@fusiontoa18
lame meme
@@Liliputian07 >he thinks its a meme 😏
@@fusiontoa18
of course it's a meme. if it wasn't a meme, you'd be defending a rapist
I think another great example here would be Hakuryuu Ren from Magi: The Labyrinth of Magic.
With his goal of killing his mother for her crimes of murdering his father and brothers and having his uncle usurp the throne from him, but tries to do it with "the moral high ground". But litteraly becomes "a fallen one" (term from the series for people who reject their given fate) in the dungeon of Belial, and joins forces with the dark magi judar, which he despised.
And later when he killed his mother it's not enough, he has nowhere to go from there. So he blames his cousin for not fighting his mother and starts a civil war over the throne in which his now beloved partner Judar dies.
And there's the point where he changes again and makes him differ from the usual pattern, because he redeems himself.
Long story short, I love this character, just thought considering him here too might be interesting.
There are some great examples in the horus heresy, see:magnus
Was loyal to the emperor, but his arrogance got the best of him, and was played like a fiddle by the enemy. One of the best ways imo is a good character who has a character flaw like arrogance, rage, or daddy issiess, and it pulls them down the path of madness
Very interesting take, and it makes sense. I have not seen the other works, but was a GoT fan, of course. It definitely makes sense that Daenerys experienced trauma, and that it might drive her to take some action - but that action would have been believable to the audience if it were directed at the cause of that trauma, her enemy. At the point of the bells ringing, she had already obliterated the Iron Fleet (thus striking at and potentially killing that enemy), destroyed the defenses of King's Landing, and mostly destroyed the Golden Company.
The only cause of her trauma that was left was Cersei. So having Daenerys attack the Red Keep directly in attempt to destroy Cersei would have made sense in the context of the events leading up to it.
The big problem and displeasure was of course that she DID achieve victory over her enemies, even if Cersei wasn't dead, she was defeated. THEN Daenerys abandons her morals and quite deeply changes who she is. This was shocking, not set up and ended up unbelievable.
I just realized Dany and Azula are both 14 in their stories. Both born royal and living through a world war with a tyrant father, an older brother, friends who are subservient to them, and both think they are Goddesses among men.
@NightHawk92 In the book she is 14. In the show she is 16/17. They aged all the characters up in the show
I'm super happy that the writing of Azula's character gets the recognition it deserves in film/tv history.
I like how Joker portrayes other possibility: Arthur descent is joyful, litterally. He feels relieved after he stops resisting and embraces absolute madness. His madness will bring chaos to the world, but he had never felt better.
I've never seen game of thrones, but I can see why people might be irked about the trauma stuffs.
Switches to talking about Azula: leaves from the vine
Me: cries
I found this channel and thought: "I wonder if it will be anything like Hello Future Me". Ten minutes in when ATLA was brought up: "Yep, exactly like Hello Future Me".
Good video, but not sure I agree with Martin's characters... They did not BECOME corrupt with power, they were just given the opportunity to show their corruption when their power gave them longer ranger. The dragon princess spent the entirety of the show screaming how she will bathe cities in fire and blood and burnt her 'enemies' in every conflict, namely people who did not agree with her. Bullies like are always bullies, be it on the schoolyard or the golden papal throne. Power doesn't make them, bullies, it just gives them more people to bully. And if they are clever enough, those same people then build them monuments and call them The Great.
Dany's turn in the books appears to be there. However the key missing part is the fact that Aegon was taken out of the show. To some extent he was merged into Jon Snow (and Dany), but poorly so. Aegon is likely to take King's Landing, which was Tyrion's advice after all. Then arrives Dany, who then meets Aegon for the first time and she wonders who is this boy who claims to be her nephew who is dead as far as she knows, and who the City loves more than her, because Aegon drove out Cersei most likely. Add in the whispers of Quaithe and the House of the Undying that warn her not to trust the "Mummer's dragon", after all the others who showed up that they said not to trust prooving true, and you have Dany in a situation where she isn't hailed as "Mhysa" or a savior--which is her preferred version of being a conqueror, but instead presented with the choice of does she trust what prophecy tells her or not? Does she accept co-rulership with Aegon or not? Does she deal well with being seen as a foreign invader who shows up Johnny come lately, rather than as a triumphal liberator?
I think that is the moment that she gets put to the test, and where I believe she will tragically fail and fall. She will choose to believe prophesy over Aegon. She will resent the city's choice of Aegon over her, and ultimately not being as well received as she expects or wants, she will release the dragon, as her dreams tell her to do, and take the city through fire and blood.
People used to complain about Aegon showing up in the books so late, however it becomes apparent that he is integral to Dany's arc overall if you sit and reflect upon him.
Wow. Spot on analysis as usual. Indeed if Missandei and Rhaegal's deaths were the direct consequence of Dany's action I would be much more convinced of her descent to full blown Mad Queen.
For example off the top of my head, she could have ordered a small party fly to King's Landing to offer Cersei an opportunity to surrender, against her council's warnings, only to be ambushed by the archers and scorpions which ultimately kill Rhaegal and Missandei. Although arguably this example is weak and again she would be portrayed as the victim here as well.
You had me as a character analysis pf azula. She is the paragon
How the heck am I supposed to watch your video when I have to keep wiping tears out of my eye because of your darned background music!?!?
I think component 4 needs a slight change, there is a third option. The character achieves their goal but it cost them something that makes it hollow. The "king of an empty world" type of madness. This usually ends with self reflection and regret.
Awesome video! Power/Corruption is one of my favorite storytelling topics (and all of your examples were in my top favorite shows!!) and this was a really great breakdown of the steps a character needs to go through to get there. As a writer it's nice to have a bit of an outline to work with!
Great video, I really appreciate your strong clarification of the difference between trauma and corruption, and how that applies to Azula and Dany's character arcs.
Hayley ^_^
Its actually pretty interesting that when asula is in charge? We see blue flames. Its eerie and unsettling but it doesn't feel like a monster hiding in a cave like when ozai is shown.
“Power is dangerous. It corrupts the best and attracts the worst. Power is only given to those who are prepared to lower themselves to pick it up.”
― Ragnar Lothbrok
I think it’s important to note that Azula suffers two betrayals before she breaks.
The first is Ty-Lee and Mae, but the second is her father.
When Ozai leaves Azula behind, she expresses shock and betrayal, and I think it’s that which finally breaks her.
Very insightful. This addresses the key point of something missing in her descent. It wasn't a descent, but rather a convenient and contrived plot element to wrap up the story. Her agency was gone from the moment she landed in Westeros, relying on her advisers and the situation to dictate her actions. She should've listened to Olenna, this would have made for a much more compelling story, and led to a much more believable descent into madness.
YOU FIGURED IT OUT MAN! you figured out why dany's descend into madness feels forced and flat. Bravo! subscribed.
Thank you for this. I have been working on a story with these themes but I never was able to short hand the path needed for it to occur. I knew where they started and the narrative path to get to the end but not WHY it was. Thanks for the tips.
I don't think anyone (*who actually thinks) is upset that Danny "went mad". People are upset at the pacing, presentation, and displayed motivations.
I think Death Note displayed Light's decent into corruption, and eventual madness incredibly well.
@RheyaRu!z a well written, and well told story could make the hero you cheered become the villain, and vice versa.
Any misogyny you're getting from this, is something youre reading into it.
@RheyaRu!z "misogynistic" **Rolls eyes**
But isn't Light corrupt from the start? He barely establishes guidelines for himself before breaking them. It honestly feels more like a story of a bad person becoming more evil as they have more power, which isn't really a decent into corruption .
@@LifeUntilLove That's precisely the case. I'm confused as to why Light, Azula and Hannible Lector were in this video as examples. They're all either psychopaths or sociopaths - born with or developed little to no empathy respectively. These characters were _revealed_ as deplorable people, not corrupted.
@@FunZies. I have to disagree with you about Light. At the very beginning, Light is not corrupted. His actions with the Death Note are brought on by a genuine desire to do what he believes to be right for the world. Over the course of the series, we watch that desire become corrupted until Light no longer cares about justice and simply cares about power and control. What starts out as a desire to make the world better, becomes a disguise for him wanting to have total control. It was the power of the death note that ultimately corrupted Light and his intentions.
Dude I hope you see this because as a young writer who is striving to create a tv show that challenges the mind, your content is so fascinating. I really enjoy everything you do and can’t thank you enough!
I’m a simple man. I hear leaves from the vine, and I cry.
Thanks so much for pointing out that corruption and trauma are like two sides to a coin! It's a similar pain, but one is brought on by yourself, one by others. Such a good hint, thanks again! I can really use that for my own story ...
One thing I LOVE about Azula's arc is that it really goes full circle. In the first episode with her in you see her commanding a ship and threatening everyone. She performs one of the hardest types of bending there is with only "one hair out of place". In her first fight with Zuko you see him trying his hardest and using fire daggers a move he'd never done before. She doesn't even fire bend during the fight instead she just uses hand to hand combat and just gets him angrier and angrier knowing that he wont think with a level head. She almost never lets her emotions cloud her judgement especially in a fight so during the finale she cuts her hair. Her hair was always perfectly symmetrical so her cutting her hair just shows how far she's fallen from perfection. In the agni kai she doesn't think with a level head but instead just let's Zuko goad her into using lightening which would just work out in his advantage. Her only thought out move during that entire fight was when she shot the lightening at Katara knowing that no matter what happens she would just have one less opponent to face. Whether you like Azula or not her descent into madness is heartbreaking. Zuko had someone to save him and she didn't.
I’m so happy you included Azula
I will never not cry when I hear those guitar strings
Everyone gangsta until leaves on the vine starts playing
Great video azula has a very compelling narrative
I love your videos! I'm a student in the Iowa Writers' Workshop and I always find myself taking notes when I watch your work.
16:31 i dont care how menacing she was that picture is the funniest shit I've seen and it has meme material to the maximum potential
Who else got emotional when uncle Iroh’s “leaves from the vine/soldier boy” song started playing in the background? 😭
To save the princess, Mario has to become Mad.
*_This---¬^_*_ is an _*_excellent_*_ essay...and doesn't have _*_NEARLY enough_*_ likes!!_
Who cares about likes
I still think that the best story of corruption is Anakin Skywalker.
"Absolute power does not corrupt absolutely, absolute attracts the corruptible"
You’re not necessarily wrong, but we also have plenty of examples of people corrupted by power that they didn’t choose to possess.
Interesting thought that meritocracy might actually make corruption more likely though.
@@Acsion42 it is refreshing to converse with someone who may...be it partially or completely disagrees with you, and have them simply voice their position without the noise and name calling. You know, to talk like adults we are.
Most people are corruptable sadly given the right situation.
For me an anime called Kiba had a really interesting story about corruption.
The main character Zed had a sick mother and late into the series she appears in the new world he travelled to. It was revealed the power that chose him initially chose her whilst pregnant, and she was trained by the same mentor as Zed. Then, after giving birth she lost that power and went crazy.
When Zed meets her she seems to be sick as he remembers her- in a vacant way. But then later she tries to kill him for his power. He gets away and it is revealed the reason why she wanted the power in the first place was to protect him.
During the entire video, I keep thinking of one of my favorite animes, Trigun and how and if these themes would apply to it
I think I'm going to keep thinking about it for several days to come
Actually, in the first appearance of spidey, the sentense was "with great power it must comes great responsibility "
i think the enigma of amigara fault by junji ito is a pretty good example of corruption, or more specifically compulsion. you should read it if you haven’t already, it’s not long
Mushrooms *_* if you’re squeamish, mmmmm it might. im a sucker for spooks but it’s still a good read
Think this was my favorite video yet. Thank you for your channel!
Dany did choose to go to westeros though causing her own trauma. I personally love dany’s arc and can’t wait for its telling in the last novel.
This may sound silly but this made me cry because I’ve brought on some much corruption in my life too. The worst part is casting about for someone to blame but you have only yourself to blame. It changes you but with faith you can heal. That’s why I bear this symbol for my channel. My hope for redemption too.
Well the Joker Dead start off as a normal person that got thrown into a vat of I said and turn insane, I know that's a really simplified version of what happened to him but that's not the point. The collapse of the killing joke mostly revolve around Joker's backstory and how he got corrupted. So yeah he does kind of fall into the storytelling category.
Also he likes to corrupt other people in the same way or at least similar ways that he was corrupted claiming that one bad day can corrupt or change anyone.
This is kinda like my theory on physical deformity in fiction. When a character is born or introduced with a deformity, those markings are intended to juxtapose internal moral fortitude or, if you will, purity. Deformities that are *earned* are intended to show a character's internal corruption making itself known to others (Ed Elric, Darth Vader, and Inquisitor Glokta).
If for a corruption story the elements are (summarized)
1) the Character has a goal and a code
2) the act of chasing that goal causes something to happen which takes a toll on the character
3) the consequences of step 2 cause an abandonment of a previously upheld character code.
Then would a story of restoration be the inverse?
1) the character is lost and hopeless, they are searching for their goal.
2) Something happens to them that ultimately results in a new goal.
3) The character begins chasing and (usually) eventually achieves his or her goal.
Obviously this presents a new set of challenges and pit falls to avoid, and is vastly simplified, but I think it generally works. Thoughts?
YES to everything you said about Dany. Brilliant video!
Absolutely love these videos. Keep it up!
I tried to make a very similar debate with my friends. I used light from death note as a way to perfectly demonstrate corruption. Because everyone complains that Dany didn't have enough time to become corrupt but death note did it in the first episode. It never even occurred to me the difference between corruption and trauma tho. Amazing video, I'm glad someone had a similar idea
Another great episode. Filled with real-life implications. You're a pretty interesting guy.
I am watching this video a year late and as such this will probably not been seen by anyone but I really want to comment on how people are misunderstanding Dani’s madness.
She didn’t become mad over night, the show and the book show it was always there. Her go to response when faced with a challenge was to kill and burn it all with her dragons. She said she would come back and destroy Quarth in season two, killing everyone in the city. Despite the fact it was only a handful of leaders who denied her entry. When she returned to see her city under attack in season 5, she told Tryon that she was going to burn the enemy cities to the ground, till there was no one left.
What changed in the final season is that she lost trust in anyone but herself. She lost the love of Jon, she didn’t trust tyron anymore and saw her two other best friends die. This allowed the darkness with in to take over and is why she burned Kings Landing. She had no one left to hold back her basic response of fire and death. Also, they show over multiple seasons that she is a conqueror and not a ruler. So when she gets Westeros, of course she ends up wanting more. It’s the battle for power that she has ever known, not the want to rule.
I think a lot of people wanted to see her over the years as only good, but the show always shows her dark side being pulled back by others, not by herself. Her being lost and incapable of trusting anyone but herself, was her downfall in the end, because the “madness” finally was able to take over.
Note, wrote this on my phone, so sorry for misspelling and grammar.
Bravo! I have watched soooooooooooo many videos and read so much about how Danis 'sudden' snap was terrible writing and it came out to left field. I've read the books and the characters in the books were waiting for her to show everyone what her family is most famous for, not all of her family, but most of them. Your comment is the first one I have seen that says what I know to be true of the story. 'Everytime a Targarrion(sp) is born the Gods flip a coin.' This seemed to have slipped pass a lot of fans. Every House was known for something honorable, or great, or decent. Danis House, craziness, brutality and dragons. Tbh, I expected EVERYTHING she became.
Your analysis is literally some of the coolest I have ever heard, I want you analysing my life, I feel like I would move up 100 IQ subconsciously.
Dany didn’t have a character arc, she had 3/4ths of an arc and a random ass nosedive into the pits of Tartarus at the final fourth.
I can't reiterate enough how much i love your videos
Thanks for always showing up man!
Damn Man ! That analysis on the corruption comming from within VS trauma from outside is awesome. The fact that part2 must be coming from the protagonist itself is fascinating. This is brilliant ! You're really good at this :O !!
This explains why I felt so slighted by the GOT finale.. trauma vs corruption... that was an amazing point! I’m going to keep this in mind for my own story
I love that you use cartoons as examples. People for some reason refuse to acknowledge good/great aspects of something they see as being made for kids.
Eddy not getting his jawbreaker lmao this channel is pure 🔥
You used Iroh’s music of him crying about the anniversary of his son’s death as the background music. So all I hear is him singing it over you talking about Azula so now I’m crying.
7:42 it should be noted that Tolkien expressly denied putting “lessons” in his stories.
Talking about how Azula's quest to become perfect lead her to corruption reminds me a lot of Dwarf in the Flask from FMAB too.
I think what the writers of Got were going for was to show that Daenerys in a way always have had the madness, just that we the audience and the characters around her never really noticed because we supported her decisions. I actually think that Tyrion’s conversation with Jon is quite great, because it retroactively shows that her madness have been present all along. But they didn’t succeed in making her “fall” seem like a climax of her arc or whatever, it should have felt like the realization you get in the “all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” scene. I wished that it would have been a gut punch, but it was simultaneously both predictable and out of character.